JCOPE board declines to shield advocacy groups’ financial reports

ALBANY >> New York’s ethics board declined Tuesday to shield the financial reports of four advocacy groups that say public disclosure of their financial backers is likely to result in threats or even harm.

The Joint Commission on Public Ethics rejected the requests of Family Planning Advocates and New York Women’s Equality Coalition, which back abortion rights. The panel also rejected requests from New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, which opposes abortion and gay marriage, and the New York Civil Liberties Union, which advocates for free speech and other individual rights.

“I think the overriding view is more transparency,” Commissioner George Weissman said. “We’ve said this in many different ways.”

The commission requires reports from state lobbyists, though it can withhold records of contributors to lobbying groups that show their donors would likely face danger, threats and harassment if disclosed.

Advertisement

Separately, the commission scaled back the disclosure exemption granted last June to NARAL Pro-Choice NY, another abortion rights advocate. That’s now scheduled to expire July 15 or almost 18 months earlier than previously approved.

Commission Chairman Daniel Horwitz said that was done after the commission revised its regulations to increase disclosure and raise the threshold for exemptions.

Three board members favored shielding financial reports from the NYCLU, Family Planning Advocates and New York Women’s Equality Coalition. When the exemption for New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms was considered, nobody on the 14-seat board proposed approving it.

“I think this is a pretty compelling case that they made,” Commissioner Paul Casteleiro said of the NYCLU. He cited threats to staff at the American Civil Liberties Union throughout the country over a period of time.

The commission is scheduled to consider formal rejection notices that will be sent to the groups when it meets again next month. After they receive the notices, they can appeal the decision.

The NYCLU said it will fight it and consider every option, including going to court.

“The Supreme Court has long recognized that donors who support organizations that engage in advocacy on controversial issues may become targets of harassment, and worse, and therefore the court has held that the government may not compel the publication of personal information regarding those individuals,” NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman said. She added that the commission itself meets in private, is “selectively secret” and has unclear and constantly changing standards.

The Rev. Jason McGuire, executive director of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, said the commission decision on its application was unfair and disappointing but not unexpected. The group plans to take “all available steps” to reverse the result, which he said is almost certain to have a chilling effect on donors to many advocacy-oriented nonprofits.

“After our application was submitted, JCOPE decided to change its regulations and its application process,” McGuire said. “However, one organization — NARAL Pro-Choice New York — had already been granted a donor disclosure exemption under JCOPE’s initial regulations. It is simply wrong to use one set of rules for one applicant and a different set of rules for all others.”